Sunday, 8 February 2015

Post = after in time or sequence; following; subsequentTraditional = 1. of or pertaining to tradition. 2. handed down by tradition. 3. in accordance with tradition.Buddhism = 1. a religion represented by the many groups
(especially in Asia) that profess various forms of the Buddhist
doctrine and that venerate Buddha. 2. a religion that originally comes
from South Asia, and teaches that personal spiritual improvement will
lead to escape from human suffering.What is a Post-Traditional approach to Buddhism?
I first came across the notion of post-traditional Buddhism in a blog
post by Hokai Sobol, a Croatian Shingon teacher who’s been involved with
the Buddhist Geeks since its inception, whilst exploring the
intersection of Vajrayana Buddhism and Western culture in his own
practice and teaching. He wrote in 2011:

“…While post-traditional in the strict
sense means evolving Buddhism beyond ethnocentric identities, parochial
attitudes, and ideologically-based loyalties, in the broad sense it
means also being alert to modern and ‘postmodern’ reactivity when it
comes to spiritual principles of authority, verticality, and devotion.
In short, it’s a challenging leap with implications for spiritual
practice, critical studies, communal discourse, institutional reform,
and political culture. Insofar as these spheres are interdependent and
mutually inclusive, the actual shift to post-traditional can only really
take place as a comprehensive strategic endeavour, bringing together
the best of premodern, modern, and ‘postmodern’ contributions, while
making sure the core principles of the Buddhist path are reasserted
effectively and compellingly.” Hokai Sobol

As he indicates, approaching Buddhism post-traditionally entails
leaving behind faithful continuity with tradition, or at least its
forms. This implies freedom from the need to replicate a specific ideal
of Buddhism as it has been received or sanctified. The extent of
departure from tradition will vary according to the extent of
disillusionment with tradition that a person has experienced and the
personal connection they have to that tradition. Hokai continues with
Shingon for his own reasons whilst others leave all forms of Buddhism
behind.
A post-traditional approach entails a particular form of freedom when
examining Buddhist materials, including teachings, beliefs, symbols,
moral behavioural guidelines, key claims and ultimate truth, without
having to adopt a Buddhist identity, internalize Buddhist beliefs,
and/or be blinded by a tradition’s particular formulation of Buddhism at
a personal, social, and cultural level.
A post-traditional approach signifies a desire to unpack, deconstruct
and evaluate elements of Buddhism as phenomena rather than as
formulations of revealed and ultimate truths. It means being critical
and placing Buddhism alongside other sources of human history, human
knowing, human understanding and praxis, to test claims and experiment.
In this sense, the way I conceive of post-traditional Buddhism has much
in common with non-Buddhism which further moves away from Buddhism as a
fountain of truth:

“Non-Buddhism is acutely interested in the
uses of Buddhist teachings, but in a way that remains unbeholden to–and
hence, unbound by and unaccountable to–the very norms that govern those
teachings. Once we have suspended the structures that constitute
“Buddhism,” once we have muted what to the believer is Buddhism’s very
vibrato, we are free to hear fresh resonances.” Glenn Wallis

A post-traditional approach means holding Buddhism up to greater
scrutiny and suspending reverence, carried out with an expanding array
of intellectual and critical skills. It means levelling the playing
field, and stripping Buddhism of its special categories. It means seeing
it, in its great diversity, as thoroughly human phenomena.
This approach to Buddhism is obviously different from that taken by the
large numbers of Westerners looking for a religious alternative to
Christianity, Judaism and atheism, or the spiritual but not religious
crowd looking to restore some sense of meaning to their lives. Those
engaged in a post-traditional relationship with Buddhism will most
likely be long-term practitioners who have ceased to be enamoured with
Buddhism’s exotic symbology, or disappointed by their lack of progress
in practice. It is an approach often more resonant with the work of
philosophers and Buddhologists studying Buddhism from the outside than
those who self-identify as Buddhist.
If it is not obvious already, you may be asking yourself, “Why should I
be interested or in need of such an approach?” A number of concepts
elaborated by Glenn Wallis might be useful for understanding who
specifically would be motivated by such an approach. For those who know
of Glenn Wallis and his work, he is considered controversial for his
attacks on the failings of contemporary Buddhists to take their Buddhist
claims seriously and for their appeasement of global capitalism and
injustice. Whatever one might make of his approach at the Speculative
Non-Buddhism site, his work and writings are of immense value to anybody
interested in deconstructing Buddhism. His original work of the same
name is a treasure trove for those intellectually dissatisfied with
Buddhism and already in the advance stages of a relational break with
the Buddha’s offspring.
Those who become deluded with Buddhism may find themselves increasingly
in a state of what Wallis defines as ‘aporetic dissonance’:

“Aporetic Dissonance: An affective
condition. The believer‘s discovery within himself or herself of a
dissonant ring of perplexity, puzzlement, confusion, and loss concerning
the integrity of Buddhism‘s self-presentation. It involves an
apprehension that buddhistic rhetorics of self-display are but instances
of acataleptic impassability. This ring is the signal for aporetic
inquiry.” From, Nascent Speculative Non-Buddhism

The language Wallis uses can be challenging but, basically, he means a
person starts to feel a form of dissonance, discomfort or
dissatisfaction towards their tradition or Buddhism in general.
Something starts to feel off and ideas that were once palpable seem to
be incoherent, false or even make believe. Practices that produced
positive feelings start to produce indifference or even discomfort.
There is a process of separation between one’s own sense of integrity
and the Buddhist ideas or practices being engaged with and the romance
begins to fade, leading to:

“Ancoric loss. An affective condition. The
irreversible termination of hope that ―Buddhism indexes the
thaumaturgical refuge adduced in its rhetorics of selfdisplay.” From, Nascent Speculative Non-Buddhism

Meaning that a person loses their blind faith in Buddhism and is no
longer able to buy into the idea it will save them in spite of its
claims to the contrary.
We can draw from this that a person needs to have had some degree of
meaningful engagement with Buddhism before a post-traditional approach
starts to make sense. Differently to Wallis’ own progress and increasing
break from Buddhism over the years to an elaboration of the
philosophically inspired non-Buddhism, a post-traditional approach
desires to find a sober basis for re-engagement with Buddhism as a
depositary of potential: in my own case, in its meditation practices and
first person accounts of meditational development. The formulation of
such re-engagement is not monolithic and does not need to lead to the
revival of Buddhism, though for some it may. By its very nature,
post-traditional implies a break from whatever tradition was followed
beforehand and an initial unwillingness to go through another
disappointing relationship with yet another Buddhist ‘partner’. One may
feel a desire to be pragmatic, to meditate still, to continue to find
value in some of the Buddhist teachings which still resonate.
Ancoric loss then signals either a total break from Buddhism, relatively
common even at the early stages in a relationship with Buddhism for
those who are after more than a new religious identity, or a need for
the formulation of a human theory of liberation in line with
developments in western thought and understanding. This means abandoning
the guarantees of historical Buddhism as a source of refuge for a less
predictable engagement with the tenets of liberation, interdependence,
decay and birth, an ethical life and the pragmatics of mind-training
through one’s own efforts and inquiry.
Such approaches are still in their infancy and primarily carried out by
individuals and sporadic small groups. There are already a number of
Western Buddhisms, although as far as I can tell, most are romantically
saturated with their Eastern precedents. In my mind, a truly Western
Buddhism would be almost unrecognisable from all forms of Eastern
Buddhism. In line with Buddhism, it would provide radical means for
discovering the lack of a solid atomised self, help us to be
experientially cognizant of the interwoven nature of being, come to
accept our finite existence and inevitable death, provide means for
developing empathic opening to other, and stimulate a profound
engagement and commitment to the world as it is along with the courage
to engage with its most pressing needs, ultimately leading to a
commitment to caring for streams of mutual becoming and flourishing that
reduce ignorance and suffering in the world.
The sciences have so far taken the lead in opening up Buddhism and
mindfulness meditation to a wider public. Mindfulness is still ‘hot at
the moment’ and the subject of many ongoing studies. Whether such
interest will be temporary is unknown. In any case, the humanities
provide better sources of conceptual tools, language and ideas as far as
giving rise to a transformation of Buddhism and its tenets into a
viable contemporary form of liberation practice. The sciences are unable
to understand what consciousness is, let alone provide a significant
understanding of the positive emotional states such as compassion,
empathy and love. This is not to dismiss the value of research being
carried out and the commitment of a number of scientists to studying the
brain, but rather a recognition that Buddhism is not only meditation,
it is also social practice, political engagement/disengagement, ideology
and a means for constructing new beliefs and relationships. Philosophy,
sociology, anthropology, ethnography, historical studies, each has much
to offer in deconstructing and building new forms of practice in these
areas of human activity.
As far as I am concerned, a truly western form of Buddhism will need to
come about through radical change, yet to emerge, in order to take a
more worthwhile incarnation in the West. To do that it must engage with
the rich intellectual and cultural history we have here and include not
just pro-positive engagement of the like we see championed by the Dalai
Lama, but more devastating and destabilising critique that is essential
to producing something altered and authentically capable of producing
praxis and formulations of human flourishing. Wallis’ own journey has
led him ever further away from Buddhism, whilst a colleague of his, Tom Pepper,
has formulated a radical revaluation of Anatman in line with Marxist
thought. Their sometimes militant approach has turned many off, but it
is certainly the most daring and creative exploration of Buddhism
currently available.
On this site, my own writings represent an attempt to carry out a
post-traditional work. My deconstruction and reformulations of the eightfold path, enlightenment, meditation and non-duality
each attempt to reformulate and lay Buddhist practice and ideas
alongside the Western thought that inspires and motivates me. I am an
amateur and as a non-academic I recognise that my writings will have
limited reach but I have a great deal of fun using this site to further
elaborate my own thoughts, intuitions, experience, and exploration. To
me, the ruthless destruction of one’s own retreat from the immediacy of
the world is electric and worth sharing.Notes
I wrote this post due to an increasing number of followers and visitors
to the Post-Traditional Buddhism site. I thought it would be helpful to define post-traditional
Buddhism as I see it and make that explicit for new visitors. Links are provided below to some of the sources
mentioned above. Please remember that my main writing activity has been taking place at posttraditionalbuddhism.com since 2013. LinksHokai Sobol’s BlogNon + X JournalSpeculative Non-BuddhismTom PepperNon-Buddhism Blog

Pages

About Me

I'm a Life Coach, Core Shamanic Counsellor and meditation teacher to boot. I also teach English in Trieste, Italy. I follow a non-traditional expression of Buddhism and also run occasional events over the border from Trieste in Slovenia on Shamanism. Email me if you're curious about any of these activities.

Benvenuti (welcome)

This blog started out as an experiment. It continues to be such to this day. The opinions you will find in these pages are my own, and like all material on this Earth, are subject to change due to that hidden factor of impermanence.

This blog started out as an experiment. Writing is an art and one which I am only now starting to develop any capacity in. All of my writing constitutes a learning process in the presentation of ideas, opinions and experience. I am no expert, but I am doing my best to develop and learn from each piece I publish.

This blog started out as an experiment. I've no idea where it will end up. I explore Buddhist and Shamanic themes in this blog. Both areas which interest a fairly small percentage of Western society. Therefore this blog is quite specialist. It goes one step further by not representing any particular tradition in either of these spiritual arenas, although I have grounding in two shamanic worlds; one a path, the other an approach to counselling. My experience of Buddhism is primarily within the Tibetan and Theravada traditions.